April 3, 2013

In my fruitless attempt to extract a retraction from the journal Child Abuse & Neglect, I quoted only the abstract of “Sexual Abuse of Children in Day Care Centers” by Susan J. Kelley, Renee Brant and Jill Waterman.

But because the 1993 article continues to be cited in the literature – most recently in the International Journal of Law and Psychiatry – it deserves a more detailed review.

Most offensive to me is the authors’ use of ostensibly sophisticated statistics. For example: “The mean number of different types of sexual acts per child ranged from 5.3 sexual acts per child in (Kathleen Coulborn) Faller’s (1988) sample to 6.6 different types of sexual abuse per child in Kelley’s (1989) study.”

Can’t you just picture the authors’ computers straining under the weight of all their meticulous research? In reality, of course, the “mean number of different types of sexual acts per child” was… zero.

And the anecdotes! What ever were Kelley, Brant and Waterman thinking as their fingers typed such unfounded claims as these:

• “Foreign objects used to penetrate children in day care center cases have included such items and pencils, needles, knives, scissors and crucifixes.”
• “Allegations of pornographic photographs and videos being taken of children in day care center cases sometimes surface…. Unfortunately, in very few cases have law enforcement officials been able to locate the pornography.”
• “Children who have been ritualistically abused describe participation in group ceremonies, use of chants and songs, adults dressed in costumes and masks, threats with supernatural powers….the sacrifice of animals, the ingestion of blood, feces and urine, and murders.”

Despite the authors’ unbridled certitude, they can’t help complaining that “One of the first complications in the evaluation of ritualistic abuse cases is the frequent disbelief and skepticism on the part of the professionals secondary to the bizarre and extreme nature of the allegations.”

“Complications,” indeed.

June 5, 2013

“More than 50 parents of alleged child victims in the Edenton day care sex abuse case issued a statement Tuesday criticizing ‘Innocence Lost’ (after) reviewers in the national press hailed the show as a compelling portrait of a small town that may have become overcome with mass hysteria:….

“ ‘ “Innocence Lost” conveyed the false impression that parents of the children came to the conclusions of sexual abuse as a hysterical reaction to rumors of abuse.

“ ‘We, as parents, came to the devastating conclusion of the sexual abuse of our children after great reluctance and only after the most convincing evidence, evidence which could not be revealed in interviews for “Innocence Lost” and can only be revealed during the trials of the defendants.’

“Specifically, the parents faulted the show for:

• “Failing to make clear that parents could not discuss ‘the factual reasons for the determinations of sexual abuse’ because of pending trials.
• “Suggesting to viewers that three state-sponsored, local therapists were responsible for evaluating the children when ‘in fact, the children were evaluated by no less than eight independent therapists, none of whom live or practice in Edenton, N.C.’
• “Giving the impression that the families who used the day care center were a ‘prestigious group’ when they represent a ‘broad economic and social cross-section of the town of Edenton.’ ”

– From “Day care parents resent implications of hysteria” (News & Observer, May 15, 1991)

Most disingenuous is the Little Rascals parents’ claim that “the most convincing evidence… could not be revealed in interviews for ‘Innocence Lost’ and can only be revealed during the trials of the defendants.”

In fact, it was the parents themselves who had so excitedly “revealed” the supposed evidence and sent it coursing unchecked through the town’s consciousness, reproducing and mutating as it spread, and resulting in unimaginable tragedy.

July 20, 2016

“Orr, a former state Supreme Court justice… angered party officials when he told a WRAL TV reporter that the nominee was ‘singularly unqualified to lead this country.’

State GOP Executive Director Dallas Woodhouse said Orr ‘hasn’t been a good Republican for a long time.’

“Orr said, ‘If I’d know there was some oath of loyalty, some code of omerta, where I couldn’t say anything against Trump, I probably wouldn’t have come.’”

– From “One NC delegate leaves GOP convention after criticizing Donald Trump” by Jim Morrill in the Charlotte Observer (July 19)

Orr’s willingness to break from the herd will be tested mightily in his efforts to undertake an external evaluation of the N.C. State Bar, which so eagerly finds ethics violations among innocence project lawyers but almost never among prosecutors….

Footnote: To the surprise of few, the N.C. Conference of District Attorneys supports restrictions on release of police body cameras and dashboard recordings.

Sept. 22, 2015

“Pedophilia, the sexual attraction to children who have not yet reached puberty, remains a vexing challenge for clinicians and public officials…. Researchers have found no effective treatment. Like other sexual orientations, pedophilia is unlikely to change….

“Estimates of recidivism vary…. One long-term study of previously convicted pedophiles (with an average follow-up of 25 years) found that one-fourth of heterosexual pedophiles and one-half of homosexual or bisexual pedophiles went on to commit another sexual offense against children….”

– From “Pessimism about pedophilia” in the Harvard Mental Health Letter (July 1, 2010)

As far as I’ve been able to tell, not a single one of the defendants in the Little Rascals, McMartin, Fells Acres, Wee Care, etc., cases has been accused of later sexual offenses – or had been accused of earlier offenses. How could the serial perpetrators of such outrageous crimes have avoided recidivism?

Footnote: The Harvard researchers also noted that “Nearly all people with pedophilic tendencies are male. Studies of child molesters have reported that only 1 percent to 6 percent of perpetrators are female”…. Wonder how the Little Rascals prosecutors explained to themselves how no fewer than five of their seven defendants happened to be women?